Title IX is changing, read more here (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/christinebrennan/post/2010/04/good-news-for-women-and-girls-on-the-title-ix-front/1) and here (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/sports/20titleix.html). See also NCAA Gender Equity (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/NCAA/About%20The%20NCAA/Diversity%20and%20Inclusion/Gender%20Equity%20and%20Title%20IX/homepage.html).

joecct

04-20-2010, 01:18 PM

Title IX is changing, read more here (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/christinebrennan/post/2010/04/good-news-for-women-and-girls-on-the-title-ix-front/1) and here (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/sports/20titleix.html). See also NCAA Gender Equity (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/NCAA/About%20The%20NCAA/Diversity%20and%20Inclusion/Gender%20Equity%20and%20Title%20IX/homepage.html).Actually, nothing changed. The Gov'mint just stopped enforcing an unenforced rule.

I love that first article he posted. Myles Brand really stood his ground and gave the Bush Admin a case of the what for. I so admired his rock-solid unwavering commitment to truth, justice and the American Way.

Well, aside from the whole whoring out male DI athletes for billions part that he never seemed to talk about much.

It is true on the NCAA side of things, as noted "Thankfully, Myles Brand, then-NCAA president, immediately issued an edict saying schools should pay no attention to the guidelines."

Matthew Webb

04-20-2010, 03:38 PM

It is true on the NCAA side of things, as noted "Thankfully, Myles Brand, then-NCAA president, immediately issued an edict saying schools should pay no attention to the guidelines."

Myles Brand should have issued another edict saying schools should also have paid no attention to Myles Brand.

Henry

04-20-2010, 09:45 PM

Title IX is a joke. It destroyed most JV collegiate sports and the truyh is the vast majority of women have no interest. Most female competitions are sparsely attended and many have to search out players. Softball, basketball hockey maybe in some schools but I don't think there is the level of participation you find with male athletes. The sisters of most of the guys my son played ball with had no interest in sports. Hate to say it but it's all another PC assault on boys and manhood.:mad:

joeyc3402

04-21-2010, 06:58 AM

Title IX is a joke. It destroyed most JV collegiate sports and the truyh is the vast majority of women have no interest. Most female competitions are sparsely attended and many have to search out players. Softball, basketball hockey maybe in some schools but I don't think there is the level of participation you find with male athletes. The sisters of most of the guys my son played ball with had no interest in sports. Hate to say it but it's all another PC assault on boys and manhood.:mad:

I concur... it's a good idea in theory (don't discriminate funding based on gender), but in implementation, it sucks. There's got to be a right balance out there. Just because you have a population, it doesn't mean there's an interest.

(sorry - I'm in violent agreement with you here)

NUProf

04-21-2010, 06:58 AM

Title IX is a joke. It destroyed most JV collegiate sports and the truyh is the vast majority of women have no interest. Most female competitions are sparsely attended and many have to search out players. Softball, basketball hockey maybe in some schools but I don't think there is the level of participation you find with male athletes. The sisters of most of the guys my son played ball with had no interest in sports. Hate to say it but it's all another PC assault on boys and manhood.:mad:

The only thing wrong with Title IX is responses like this and the fact that too many schools have responded not by expanding opportunities for women, but by contracting opportunities for men. This was never the intent of the framers of Title IX (which is not just focused on athletics, but on all facets of college life).

Without title IX, I doubt very much that we would have seen the expansion of Women's hockey that has taken place in the past few years. Unfortunately, some people see the phrase "Title IX" and respond with an uninformed, knee-jerk negative reaction.

joeyc3402

04-21-2010, 07:05 AM

The only thing wrong with Title IX is responses like this and the fact that too many schools have responded not by expanding opportunities for women, but by contracting opportunities for men. This was never the intent of the framers of Title IX (which is not just focused on athletics, but on all facets of college life).

Without title IX, I doubt very much that we would have seen the expansion of Women's hockey that has taken place in the past few years. Unfortunately, some people see the phrase "Title IX" and respond with an uninformed, knee-jerk negative reaction.

Like I said in my post, it's the right idea, but the implementation is a mess.

Henry

04-21-2010, 07:33 AM

If you are really a Prof you made my point.:D

joecct

04-21-2010, 10:00 AM

The only thing wrong with Title IX is responses like this and the fact that too many schools have responded not by expanding opportunities for women, but by contracting opportunities for men. This was never the intent of the framers of Title IX (which is not just focused on athletics, but on all facets of college life).

Without title IX, I doubt very much that we would have seen the expansion of Women's hockey that has taken place in the past few years. Unfortunately, some people see the phrase "Title IX" and respond with an uninformed, knee-jerk negative reaction.Prof

Very true, but if your athletic pie is only so big, and suddenly you have more hands wanting pieces of the pie, you have to either bake a bigger pie, cut down on the size of the portions, or restrict the number of hands getting their mitts on the pie.

Remember, Prof, women suck the life essence from men. This causes weakness and confusion, which led, in 1946, to the flouridation of our drinking water and the rise of the vast communist conspiracy. It was in the midst of this conspiracy that Title IX was born. Its sole intent Prof, its sole intent, was to weaken our men and make them less fit to rule. Our society is becoming a matriarchy and we men are becoming subservient.

No, Prof, this must stop, this must come TO AN END!! It is time (cue music) for we men to stand up and take back what is ours! No more will it be "Yes, Dear." We will reclaim our heritage and win our women by besting our opponents on the athletic field or in mortal combat! We are genectically superior and we must reclaim our primacy or die trying!!!

The preceeding rant was brought to you by Strangelove Enterprises, a division of Ripper Industries

NUProf

04-21-2010, 10:04 AM

Prof

Very true, but if your athletic pie is only so big, and suddenly you have more hands wanting pieces of the pie, you have to either bake a bigger pie, cut down on the size of the portions, or restrict the number of hands getting their mitts on the pie.

Remember, Prof, women suck the life essence from men. This causes weakness and confusion, which led, in 1946, to the flouridation of our drinking water and the rise of the vast communist conspiracy. It was in the midst of this conspiracy that Title IX was born. Its sole intent Prof, its sole intent, was to weaken our men and make them less fit to rule. Our society is becoming a matriarchy and we men are becoming subservient.

No, Prof, this must stop, this must come TO AN END!! It is time (cue music) for we men to stand up and take back what is ours! No more will it be "Yes, Dear." We will reclaim our heritage and win our women by besting our opponents on the athletic field or in mortal combat! We are genectically superior and we must reclaim our primacy or die trying!!!

The preceeding rant was brought to you by Strangelove Enterprises, a division of Ripper Industries

How's that baby eating thing working out Jonathan :D?

norm1909

04-21-2010, 10:07 AM

Prof

Very true, but if your athletic pie is only so big, and suddenly you have more hands wanting pieces of the pie, you have to either bake a bigger pie, cut down on the size of the portions, or restrict the number of hands getting their mitts on the pie.

Remember, Prof, women suck the life essence from men. This causes weakness and confusion, which led, in 1946, to the flouridation of our drinking water and the rise of the vast communist conspiracy. It was in the midst of this conspiracy that Title IX was born. Its sole intent Prof, its sole intent, was to weaken our men and make them less fit to rule. Our society is becoming a matriarchy and we men are becoming subservient.

No, Prof, this must stop, this must come TO AN END!! It is time (cue music) for we men to stand up and take back what is ours! No more will it be "Yes, Dear." We will reclaim our heritage and win our women by besting our opponents on the athletic field or in mortal combat! We are genectically superior and we must reclaim our primacy or die trying!!!

The preceeding rant was brought to you by Strangelove Enterprises, a division of Ripper Industries

The only thing wrong with Title IX is responses like this and the fact that too many schools have responded not by expanding opportunities for women, but by contracting opportunities for men. This was never the intent of the framers of Title IX (which is not just focused on athletics, but on all facets of college life).

Without title IX, I doubt very much that we would have seen the expansion of Women's hockey that has taken place in the past few years. Unfortunately, some people see the phrase "Title IX" and respond with an uninformed, knee-jerk negative reaction.

One of the other unfortunates is that some universities are now under-represented on the male side. This is true at Norwich I believe, where 1 in 3 female students has an opprtunity to play a varsity sport, yet only 1 on 4 males have that opportunity. Because of the high percnetage of males on campus, I think that would equate to supplying opportunity for additional 100 males.
I have no problem with sharing equitably, what concerns me is that the attitude too often becomes one of demanding a part of the pie for zero effort.

XCTiger

04-21-2010, 02:18 PM

Prof

Very true, but if your athletic pie is only so big, and suddenly you have more hands wanting pieces of the pie, you have to either bake a bigger pie, cut down on the size of the portions, or restrict the number of hands getting their mitts on the pie.

Remember, Prof, women suck the life essence from men. This causes weakness and confusion, which led, in 1946, to the flouridation of our drinking water and the rise of the vast communist conspiracy. It was in the midst of this conspiracy that Title IX was born. Its sole intent Prof, its sole intent, was to weaken our men and make them less fit to rule. Our society is becoming a matriarchy and we men are becoming subservient.

No, Prof, this must stop, this must come TO AN END!! It is time (cue music) for we men to stand up and take back what is ours! No more will it be "Yes, Dear." We will reclaim our heritage and win our women by besting our opponents on the athletic field or in mortal combat! We are genectically superior and we must reclaim our primacy or die trying!!!

The preceeding rant was brought to you by Strangelove Enterprises, a division of Ripper Industries

Were a fog machine and a laser show part of the dog and pony show? Inquiring minds want to know.

norm1909

04-22-2010, 08:50 PM

Were a fog machine and a laser show part of the dog and pony show? Inquiring minds want to know.

But the "2010 USA women’s ice hockey silver medalist team" was.

cooperalls

05-25-2010, 08:56 AM

Prof,

Are you kidding me this is the dumbest rule out there that was ever established. This is like the Unions telling the Corporation no you can't do that because you offer Football and have 80 kids on the roster and now you need to field either a women's football team or offer the same amount of sports for 80 women.

After all I thought Div. III schools the kids are there to choose the school for the school and for academics not sports so where does Title IX come in on that and if the school didn't offer a sport they wanted to do then they can start a club. The problem is that they want a sport to go immediately if a men's sport is added due to popularity and then the school has to scramble and spend money and come up with a plans to add their new field hockey program and how it will serve the school. There is no time limit to implement the program right. Maybe if the Title IX were to allow that if a men's sport was added due to popularity and research they could allow three years to implement a women's team.

Women's hockey started because of the growth overall in youth hockey this rule kills men's sports that have numbers and currently is holding back the growth of ice hockey in general as some schools I have heard first hand either want to move from Club to Varsity status the problem that is holding them back is Title IX so they can't unless someone wants to donate and fund the women's team.

The only thing wrong with Title IX is responses like this and the fact that too many schools have responded not by expanding opportunities for women, but by contracting opportunities for men. This was never the intent of the framers of Title IX (which is not just focused on athletics, but on all facets of college life).

Without title IX, I doubt very much that we would have seen the expansion of Women's hockey that has taken place in the past few years. Unfortunately, some people see the phrase "Title IX" and respond with an uninformed, knee-jerk negative reaction.

NUProf

05-25-2010, 02:35 PM

Prof,

Are you kidding me this is the dumbest rule out there that was ever established. This is like the Unions telling the Corporation no you can't do that because you offer Football and have 80 kids on the roster and now you need to field either a women's football team or offer the same amount of sports for 80 women.

It's not the rule, it's not the NCAA, it's the way the rule is implemented for athletics. Title IX applies to all facets of academic life, not just athletics.